[Labs-l] Getting rid of the test branch - get ready for a slight workflow change!

[Andrew Otto]

Ryan!  This is great!

I use a local VM rather than labs to test out my puppet changes.  In the past I've maintained two local working copies of puppet:  One for production and the other for my test VM.  Now I can use the same working copy for both my VM and for production, woohoo!  I can test my puppet changes before I commit them!

-Andrew Otto


On Jun 20, 2012, at 1:04 PM, Ryan Lane wrote:

>> Reconciling the diff between 'test' and 'production' sounds fantastic.
>>  But... won't there still be cases where a test branch is needed?  For
>> example, I sometimes like to run tests on a fresh instance in order to make
>> sure that I can build the configuration in a single, clean run.  If I can
>> only test my changes on a system that has puppetmaster::self installed, then
>> that machine is no longer 'fresh'.
>> 
>> Clearly having a per-project puppetmaster (with a project-specific branch)
>> is a better solution than having a global test branch... but in the meantime
>> I'm not sure I'm ready to give up having a place where I can push patches
>> and know that I won't accidentally take the encyclopedia offline.
>> 
> 
> If puppet runs on the local instance without issues, then it should in
> production as well. In production we don't build a server from
> scratch. We install it, run puppet, add the classes, then run puppet,
> etc. Current servers shouldn't be affected. Also, we'll do code review
> before its merged.
> 
> What you mention is a problem, though. The long-term goal is to switch
> the repo to use modules, then we can have an environment per branch on
> the puppet master. This will take a long, long time, though.
> 
> - Ryan
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Labs-l mailing list
> Labs-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l